The Eucharist: True differences between Catholics and Orthodox???

[Erose]

.

 

[Erose]

A priest cannot serve a Eucharistic Liturgy without others being present in the Orthodox Church. If I remember correctly- a priest can do that in the RCC...feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes that is a practice in the Catholic Church. All priests are required if possible to preside over one Mass a day. Normally that is done with the parishioners at morning mass. This is done in order to honor the prophecy found in Malachi 1:11 No corner of the world, from sun’s rise to sun’s setting, where the renown of me is not heard among the Gentiles, where sacrifice is not done, and pure offering made in my honour; so revered is my name, says the Lord of hosts, there among the Gentiles; ... So when one really thinks about it, there isn't a moment in time except for Good Friday, where a mass isn't being held somewhere in the world.

 

[Erose]

When it comes to practices, I think we can all agree with the fact that there are differences and quite a few. Theological ones is the primary focus of this thread. For example as stated in the other thread, Orthodox Christians have an issue with the Doctrine of Transubstantiation. The question I have is why?

 

[~Anastasia~]

When it comes to practices, I think we can all agree with the fact that there are differences and quite a few. Theological ones is the primary focus of this thread. For example as stated in the other thread, Orthodox Christians have an issue with the Doctrine of Transubstantiation. The question I have is why?

I think the only way to explore that is to bring out the Catechism in its entirety, and then honestly an Orthodox priest would be better to answer the question. There are simply many things said in regard to the change in the Eucharist in the Catholic teaching that we never hear in any form. So I'm not sure what Catholics mean, and I'm not sure if we agree. But the fact that we never say such things is a strong indication that we don't. Orthodox say quite a lot. We have many and very descriptive words for what we do believe. So I am inclined to think that if we believed it, we would express it. The very fact that we do not in itself makes me very skeptical.

 

[All4Christ]

Yes that is a practice in the Catholic Church. All priests are required if possible to preside over one Mass a day. Normally that is done with the parishioners at morning mass. This is done in order to honor the prophecy found in Malachi 1:11 No corner of the world, from sun’s rise to sun’s setting, where the renown of me is not heard among the Gentiles, where sacrifice is not done, and pure offering made in my honour; so revered is my name, says the Lord of hosts, there among the Gentiles; ... So when one really thinks about it, there isn't a moment in time except for Good Friday, where a mass isn't being held somewhere in the world.

Another consideration, part of this is due to a liturgy being the "work of the people".

Sorry - can't explain more right now (at work), but it is an interesting concept to explore.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Another consideration, part of this is due to a liturgy being the "work of the people".

Sorry - can't explain more right now (at work), but it is an interesting concept to explore.

Yes, there IS a theological component.

It's not how often priests conduct the Liturgy, it is that they CANNOT consecrate the Eucharist by themselves. At least one other person MUST be there to join in the prayers and add the "Amen" at the very least, or there is no Liturgy (work of the people). There is no such thing as preparing and receiving communion, alone.

I hope that explains a bit of what you would say, A4C.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I thought I read once that Orthodox churches only hold one Divine Liturgy per day out of conviction that the entire church should be gathered for worship rather than being divided at different liturgy times on the same day. Am I remembering that correctly? I find that an appealing concept regardless of whether I remember correctly.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I thought I read once that Orthodox churches only hold one Divine Liturgy per day out of conviction that the entire church should be gathered for worship rather than being divided at different liturgy times on the same day. Am I remembering that correctly? I find that an appealing concept regardless of whether I remember correctly.

There is only one Divine Liturgy per liturgical day. I'm not sure if that is restricted by the priest, or the altar, or both.

We receive the Eucharist only once in a liturgical day. If we were to travel between parishes somehow and attend two liturgies, we could not receive at them both.

I'm also not positive of the reason, though now I want to know. Your question seems very likely to me.

 

[All4Christ]

There is only one Divine Liturgy per liturgical day. I'm not sure if that is restricted by the priest, or the altar, or both.

We receive the Eucharist only once in a liturgical day. If we were to travel between parishes somehow and attend two liturgies, we could not receive at them both.

I'm also not positive of the reason, though now I want to know. Your question seems very likely to me.

I think part of the reason for only partaking one time a day is due to our requirements of preparing for the Eucharist, including fasting. If we partake twice in a day - we already broke the fast!

That said, there are exceptions out of economia to priests only holding one Divine Liturgy a day. My husband's grandfather (Memory Eternal) was a priest of a very large parish -I think he said there were over 500 families! He could not partake at both services, but he was able to celebrate the liturgy twice out of necessity.

 

[Erose]

Another consideration, part of this is due to a liturgy being the "work of the people".

Sorry - can't explain more right now (at work), but it is an interesting concept to explore.

I do think that this is a difference in our understandings of the liturgy. If I would guess, and I'm guessing here so correct me if I'm wrong, that in the Eastern Churches the divine office isn't prayed outside the congregation?

In Catholicism, the liturgy is viewed as yes the prayer of the Church, and wherever the liturgy is prayed, whether in a communal setting or alone, it is viewed that it is always prayed with the Church as a whole. I.e. when I say the Divine Office, alone; this prayer is being done in conjunction with all members of the Church praying the Divine Office, everywhere throughout the world. The liturgy is a uniting of the whole Church in a single prayer to God.

Hopefully this makes sense, and I'm not saying that our viewpoint or understanding is right and yours is wrong, just a different understanding. Perhaps in a sense Catholicism emphasizes the union of the whole Church as one, while Orthodoxy emphasizes the local Church more. I don't know just openly speculating here.

 

[Erose]

There is only one Divine Liturgy per liturgical day. I'm not sure if that is restricted by the priest, or the altar, or both.

We receive the Eucharist only once in a liturgical day. If we were to travel between parishes somehow and attend two liturgies, we could not receive at them both.

I'm also not positive of the reason, though now I want to know. Your question seems very likely to me.

Individually Catholics are only allowed to partake once per day. A priest can do more than once, if necessary. Catholic Church says Mass on Sundays more than once in larger parishes where the congregation size exceeds the size of the Church, and in some cases to benefit workers in the area who are forced because of their jobs to work on Sunday. Then you may see an afternoon Mass on Sundays as well.

 

[~Anastasia~]

We do have a sense of our prayers being joined as a body as a whole. The fact that others are praying the same prayers at the same times each day (adjusted for time zones of course).

When we pray privately, we still pray ... OUR Father, have mercy on US and save US, and so on, in the wording of many prayers.

ETA: (Actually OUR Father is a bad example, because for other reasons we say OUR, but it was what came to mind - sorry!)

 

[~Anastasia~]

Ok, I have the answer from an Abbot friend of mine. Lovely man. STRICT but I can always count on him.

He said the ONE Liturgy is to emphasize the One Church, One Cup, One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One Family of God.

While there are sometimes concessions made in large parishes, those with multiple languages, or other necessary reasons, there should be only one Liturgy served on a given day on any altar or by a particular priest, in order to preserve the principle of the One Liturgy.


(I'm sure A4C's husband's grandfather was given a dispensation for the necessity of the good of the people.)

I love the reason. I'm so glad I asked and received that.

 

[All4Christ]

I do think that this is a difference in our understandings of the liturgy. If I would guess, and I'm guessing here so correct me if I'm wrong, that in the Eastern Churches the divine office isn't prayed outside the congregation?

In Catholicism, the liturgy is viewed as yes the prayer of the Church, and wherever the liturgy is prayed, whether in a communal setting or alone, it is viewed that it is always prayed with the Church as a whole. I.e. when I say the Divine Office, alone; this prayer is being done in conjunction with all members of the Church praying the Divine Office, everywhere throughout the world. The liturgy is a uniting of the whole Church in a single prayer to God.

Hopefully this makes sense, and I'm not saying that our viewpoint or understanding is right and yours is wrong, just a different understanding. Perhaps in a sense Catholicism emphasizes the union of the whole Church as one, while Orthodoxy emphasizes the local Church more. I don't know just openly speculating here.

We certainly can pray the hours on our own. Before I answer more - could you clarify that the Divine Office means something like the Office of the Hours? For example, first, third, sixth, ninth, compline, vespers, midnight office, matins...?

 

[dzheremi]

In case any of our EO friends are wondering (I know I was, since we don't do this in the Coptic Orthodox Church), this is what a Catholic priest-only mass looks like, though this is technically a Maronite liturgy/qurbono, not Latin mass:

According to the uploader's comments, the celebrant is one Fr. Antonio Elfeghali, and the way that this works is that he just recites both the priest's parts and the responses (by which I take it the uploader means both the deacon's and the congregation's parts).

 

[All4Christ]

In case any of our EO friends are wondering (I know I was, since we don't do this in the Coptic Orthodox Church), this is what a Catholic priest-only mass looks like, though this is technically a Maronite liturgy/qurbono, not Latin mass:

According to the uploader's comments, the celebrant is one Fr. Antonio Elfeghali, and the way that this works is that he just recites both the priest's parts and the responses (by which I take it the uploader means both the deacon's and the congregation's parts).

Interesting - thanks @dzheremi . I was wondering the same thing!

That reminds me, @Erose, while we certainly can and should pray the hours, we use a reader's version of the services, not a version with the responses and prayers of the priest.

 

[Erose]

We certainly can pray the hours on our own. Before I answer more - could you clarify that the Divine Office means something like the Office of the Hours? For example, first, third, sixth, ninth, compline, vespers, midnight office, matins...?

Yes. It has quite a few names, Divine Office, Liturgy of the Hours, Breviary.

 

[Erose]

Interesting - thanks @dzheremi . I was wondering the same thing!

That reminds me, @Erose, while we certainly can and should pray the hours, we use a reader's version of the services, not a version with the responses and prayers of the priest.

In our office there are parts that are used if a priest or deacon is present, that are not used when one is not as well.

 

[Erose]

Anyway back to the OP. I think from what I see on this thread and on others that the biggest issue, is that we defined in more clarity what happens in the consecration of the Eucharist. I think this is a difference between us I guess? Western Christians meditate on the teachings and what they mean it seems far more than they currently do in the East. I do wonder how the diaspora of Orthodoxy into the West is going to affect the Eastern Church's positions of letting be be.

Transubstantiation is a simple doctrine. It states that during the Mass, the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of Christ, without loosing the properties (or accidents) of bread and wine. We believe that this becoming is a substantial change. So the bread and wine are not possessed by Christ, nor do we believe that this is a symbolic change, nor do we believe that the Body and Blood of Christ shares existence with the bread and wine.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I do think though that (as I was trying to make understood in the other thread) ... it's not JUST that we claim we don't know. I think it's very important to our understanding that we believe we CAN'T know certain details, and further, that it is wrong to try to delve into them.

I think I can say that we would say that the Catholic teaching as far as the details of what is materially present, may be correct on any points, all points, or no points, as far as we know. So you may be right. But we would not meditate on such things.

We really go no further than the Eucharist being the true Body and blood of the Risen Christ. And as I think I said earlier, the question "is it the Body and the blood, or is it the bread and wine" would get a simple answer of "yes".

I have probably missed a few other points (being changed by the Holy Spirit, for example), but that is very nearly the complete total of what we know, and just as importantly, what we believe we CAN know.

In this case, we are not free to speculate or add anything, just because it doesn't contradict these points. The Mystery beyond what is delineated is PART OF the teaching, so adding to it in this case would specifically go against what we believe.



Whether it might not get confused with some, I cannot say. It probably will. I've met a few Orthodox converts who were received and not corrected of certain errors, so I'm sure it can happen. Hopefully we always do our best to teach and learn, and these things will be minimized.